<?xml version="1.0" encoding="utf-8" standalone="yes"?><rss version="2.0" xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"><channel><title>ineffective assistance of counsel on Texas Appeals Journal</title><link>https://texasappeals.org/topics/ineffective-assistance-of-counsel/</link><description>Clinical descriptions of the Texas appellate decisions drawing the most press coverage.</description><generator>Hugo -- gohugo.io</generator><language>en-us</language><lastBuildDate>Mon, 09 Feb 2026 07:00:00 -0600</lastBuildDate><atom:link href="https://texasappeals.org/topics/ineffective-assistance-of-counsel/index.xml" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/><item><title>Court of Criminal Appeals Grants Actual-Innocence Relief to Carmen Mejia in Travis County Felony-Murder Case</title><link>https://texasappeals.org/2026/02/ex-parte-mejia-actual-innocence/</link><pubDate>Mon, 09 Feb 2026 07:00:00 -0600</pubDate><guid>https://texasappeals.org/2026/02/ex-parte-mejia-actual-innocence/</guid><description>In a brief per curiam opinion with no stated analysis, the court agreed that Mejia established actual innocence, set aside her three convictions, and remanded her to the custody of the Travis County sheriff to answer the indictment. Judge Finley, joined by Judge Parker, agreed she is entitled to relief but would have granted it under Article 11.073 rather than on actual-innocence grounds.</description></item><item><title>Fifth Circuit Vacates Capital Murder Conviction of Brittany Holberg, Holding State Court Unreasonably Applied Brady to Undisclosed Informant Evidence</title><link>https://texasappeals.org/2025/03/holberg-v-lumpkin-capital-habeas/</link><pubDate>Mon, 10 Mar 2025 07:00:00 -0500</pubDate><guid>https://texasappeals.org/2025/03/holberg-v-lumpkin-capital-habeas/</guid><description>A divided panel held that evidence the State did not disclose—that a jailhouse witness was a paid police informant—was favorable and material impeachment evidence under Brady v. Maryland, and that the state court’s contrary ruling was an unreasonable application of clearly established Supreme Court law. Judge Duncan dissented on materiality.</description></item></channel></rss>